More stories

  • in

    Today’s Wordle Answer for Dec. 8, 2024

    Scroll down for hints and conversation about the puzzle for Sunday, Dec. 8, 2024.Welcome to The Wordle Review. Be warned: This page contains spoilers for today’s puzzle. Solve Wordle first, or scroll at your own risk.Wordle is released at midnight in your time zone. In order to accommodate all time zones, there will be two Wordle Reviews live every day, dated based on Eastern Standard Time. If you find yourself on the wrong review, check the number of your puzzle, and go to this page to find the corresponding review.Need a hint?Give me a consonantNGive me a vowelAOpen the comments section for more hints, scores, and conversation from the Wordle community.Today’s DifficultyThe difficulty of each puzzle is determined by averaging the number of guesses provided by a small panel of testers who are paid to solve each puzzle in advance to help us catch any issues and inconsistencies.Today’s average difficulty is 5.8 guesses out of 6, or very challenging.For more in-depth analysis, visit our friend, WordleBot.Today’s WordClick to revealToday’s word is HYENA, a noun. According to Webster’s New World College Dictionary, it refers to a “wolflike carnivore” with a shrill cry “suggestive of laughter.”Our Featured ArtistChristina Chung is a queer Taiwanese Hong Konger American illustrator, raised in Seattle and Singapore and currently based in Brooklyn. Her work focuses on intricacies, color and symbolism, drawing inspiration from the natural world and powerful storytelling.Further ReadingSee the archive for past and future posts.If you solved for a word different from what was featured today, please refresh your page.Join the conversation on social media! Use the hashtag #wordlereview to chat with other solvers.Leave any thoughts you have in the comments! Please follow community guidelines:Be kind. Comments are moderated for civility.Having a technical issue? Use the help button in the settings menu of the Games app.See the Wordle Glossary for information on how to talk about Wordle.Want to talk about Spelling Bee? Check out our Spelling Bee Forum.Want to talk about Connections? Check out our Connections Companion.Trying to go back to the puzzle? More

  • in

    A Guy I Know Had a Liver Transplant. Now He’s Boozing Again.

    The magazine’s Ethicist columnist on how to support someone with an addiction problem.My significant other has a friend who is a longtime alcoholic, while also being intelligent, entertaining and conniving. For example, he used to tell his wife he was going to the gym and then head to the bar; before returning home, he’d dampen his clothes in the bathroom to make it seem as if he’d gotten a good sweat on. He was off the radar for a bit, and then we learned he had a liver transplant. After that, he had an episode of hepatic encephalopathy, a brain disorder caused by liver dysfunction. It seems the doctors knew he was still drinking but gave him the new liver anyway and counseled abstinence. A few parties later, he was sneaking vodka, gin and whatever else was around. He lies to everyone and has made his guy friends vow not to tell his wife about his drinking. They’ve made a meager attempt to confront him, only to be assured that he just fell off the wagon and would be good. Just don’t tell the wife!I’m appalled that they’re going along with this. There are a couple of ethical issues here. First, who should decide whether someone is entitled to a transplant? Some hospital systems deny a liver transplant to patients who continue to drink alcohol, and other hospitals don’t. Second, do the friends have an obligation to tell this man’s wife that he’s still drinking? She could insist he leave the house and go to rehab, in which case he might have a chance of living long enough to see his children get married. Some additional context: A friend of mine died waiting for a liver transplant. I am also the child of a lifelong alcoholic. — Name WithheldFrom the Ethicist:There’s more than one morally defensible way of allocating donor organs. In the United States, as in Western Europe, the system emphasizes equity and basically gives priority to patients with the greatest need. An approach that focused instead on efficiency — on getting the maximum use out of donated livers, as measured by ‘‘quality-adjusted life years’’ — might give an edge to people who were younger and otherwise healthier and might work against low-income and minority populations.Organ allocation in the United States is governed by the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (O.P.T.N.), whose policies determine the order in which deceased-donor organs are offered; they do not, however, dictate medical practice. So it’s up to a medical center to decide whether or not transplant candidates with alcohol-related liver disease are to abstain from alcohol for some period — six months having long been a typical sobriety window. Some studies indicate that carefully selected patients who aren’t subject to a sobriety window can do just as well as those who are (though the data is hard to interpret because of the ‘‘carefully selected’’ part). And if your drinking has caused a severe case of acute hepatitis that doesn’t respond to medical treatment, you probably won’t survive a six-month waiting period. So the trend seems to be away from requiring an extended interval of abstinence.The point is that the current system for allocating this scarce resource is morally legitimate, whatever trade-offs it may entail; its architects are perfectly aware that many liver recipients will not succeed in refraining from heavy drinking afterward. The fact that this longtime alcoholic has returned to his old habits is distressing. It doesn’t mean that the system isn’t functioning the way it’s meant to.One thing that transplant centers may try to determine is whether patients with an alcohol problem have social networks that could help them stay sober. This brings us to your second question. This fellow’s friends weren’t looking after him when they agreed to uphold this boozy bro code and keep mum. He doesn’t want to die, but he’s drinking himself to death, which means that, at least in this key area, he lacks the capacity for rational decision-making. In a situation like that, it’s more important to attend to his interests than to respect his autonomy. If there’s a chance that his life can be extended by successful management of his alcoholism, and if discussing the problem with his wife will help, thoughtful friends would do just that.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    What’s on Your Best-of List for 2024? We Want to Know.

    Best cocktail or mocktail? Best advice? Best app you discovered? We want to know your highly subjective, hyper-specific, genre-agnostic favorites from the past year.What’s on your best-of list for 2024? Forget about genre, forget the usual year-end list categories and think about everything you consumed. What was the best breakfast you devised? The best song lyric? The best tradition you started or ended, the best movie you rediscovered, the best piece of advice you received? Make up your own categories! Go wild! (For inspiration, check out reader favorites from past years.)We read every submission, and we plan to use some in upcoming newsletters that highlight readers’ year-end picks and favorite advice. We won’t publish any part of your response without following up with you first, verifying your information and hearing back from you. And we won’t share your contact information outside the Times newsroom or use it for any reason other than to get in touch with you.Morning Readers’ Best Of 2024 More

  • in

    Corrections: Dec. 7, 2024

    Corrections that appeared in print on Saturday, Dec. 7, 2024.NATIONALAn article on Wednesday about Sheriff Chad Chronister, President-elect Donald J. Trump’s pick to lead the Drug Enforcement Administration, withdrawing his name from consideration for the office misstated Pam Bondi’s role at the Hillsborough County State Attorney’s Office. She was a prosecutor in and a spokeswoman for the office; she was not in charge of it.MAGAZINEAn article on Page 18 this weekend about psychosis and race misstates the occupation of Deidre Anglin’s grandmother. She worked as a nanny, not a house cleaner.OBITUARIESAn obituary on Nov. 30 about Robert W. Dixon Sr., who was stationed at West Point with the Ninth Cavalry Regiment during World War II, credited him with an erroneous distinction. He was not the last survivor of the Army’s all-Black units historically known as Buffalo Soldiers; there are at least two surviving members — Roy Caldwood and the jazz saxophonist Marshall Allen — of the 92nd Infantry Division, nicknamed the Buffalo Soldiers Division, which saw combat in Europe during World War II.Errors are corrected during the press run whenever possible, so some errors noted here may not have appeared in all editions.To contact the newsroom regarding correction requests, please email nytnews@nytimes.com. To share feedback, please visit nytimes.com/readerfeedback.Comments on opinion articles may be emailed to letters@nytimes.com.For newspaper delivery questions: 1-800-NYTIMES (1-800-698-4637) or email customercare@nytimes.com. More

  • in

    Read President Yoon’s Speech Apologizing for Declaring Martial Law in South Korea

    President Yoon Suk Yeol of South Korea delivered the following televised address on Saturday morning:My fellow citizens,I declared emergency martial law at 11 p.m. on Dec. 3. About two hours later, at around 1 a.m. on Dec. 4, I ordered the withdrawal of the armed forces in accordance with the National Assembly’s resolution to lift martial law, and lifted martial law after a late-night cabinet meeting.The declaration of martial law was born out of desperation as the president, the ultimate head of state, but it caused anxiety and discomfort to the people in the process. I am deeply sorry for this, and I sincerely apologize to the people who must have been greatly surprised.I will not dodge my legal and political responsibility for this declaration of martial law. There is talk of martial law being imposed again, but let me be clear: There will never be a second martial law.My fellow citizens, I will entrust my party with the task of stabilizing the country, including my term in office. My party and the government will be responsible for the management of the country’s affairs in the future.I would like to bow my head and apologize once again for the worry I caused to the people. More

  • in

    Trump and Harris Campaigns Met to Talk Tactics. It Wasn’t Pretty.

    Leaders of the Trump and Harris campaigns met this week to talk tactics. It wasn’t pretty.Reader, we wrote you this newsletter in a tense room in Cambridge.The walls were covered in dark-wood paneling. A U-shaped conference table was elegantly draped with maroon tablecloths and decorated with little jars of roses and calla lilies.On one side of the table sat several senior staff members for the Biden-Harris campaign who looked a little bit as if they were undergoing a collective root canal without anesthesia. On the other side sat five leading Trump campaign staff members and allies who looked a little bit as if they were holding the dentist’s drill.After every presidential election, the Institute of Politics at the Harvard Kennedy School invites campaign strategists for both general-election candidates — as well as key staff members from losing primary campaigns — to unload about what happened. The discussions, which take place on panels moderated by journalists, can get heated, as they did in 2016. Maybe some years the event feels cathartic. This year, though, the big word was flawless.Sheila Nix, Vice President Kamala Harris’s campaign chief of staff, used it on Thursday as each campaign outlined over dinner what had been its main strategy, saying Ms. Harris “ran a pretty flawless campaign.” And then Chris LaCivita, one of President-elect Donald Trump’s campaign managers, lobbed the word back at Team Biden/Harris during one of the panels today.“Flawless execution,” he sarcastically interjected, after Jennifer O’Malley Dillon, the chair of the Biden and then the Harris campaign, labored to answer a question about the fateful debate that ended President Biden’s campaign.LaCivita’s interruption got at a central tension in the aftermath of the election, one that has grated on Democrats outside the room and became a target of mockery from the Trump staff members inside it. For a campaign that lost, the Biden-Harris team has been reluctant to admit to specific mistakes — and that pattern continued today. They admitted they had lost, but their diagnosis was more about the mood of the country than tactical errors on their part. The ultimate answer may be a combination of both factors.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Special Education Services With a Catch: Parents Are Asked Not to Sue

    New York City school officials want families seeking such services to waive their right to sue the Education Department in exchange for receiving them. New York City parents who missed a rarely enforced deadline to apply for their children’s special education services can now receive those services, but only if they agree not to sue the Education Department.The requirement affects about 3,500 families whose children attend private or religious schools or are home-schooled and receive resources such as teacher aides who attend class with them, speech therapy and occupational therapy.About 17,000 families successfully filed to participate in the system this year by the June 1 deadline, which had not been enforced in previous years. The families who missed the cutoff were left in limbo.Because they missed the deadline, their children have not gotten the services so far this school year. The waiver, which the Education Department sent to affected parents on Thursday, would provide the families expedited services in about three days, said Nicole Brownstein, a spokeswoman for the city Education Department.But one lawyer who specializes in education issues described the waiver as “highly problematic” because of its vague wording, and another said such a pre-emptive move was extremely unusual. City Council members learned about the new waiver program during a briefing on Thursday.“I think it’s outrageous,” said Councilman Keith Powers, who attended the meeting with the Education Department. He added, “It feels wrong, and the whole process has been a mess from the very beginning.”We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More